Originally posted by constantwonder
why do we continue to entertain this hoaxer

Dunno, YOU go first with YOUR answer?

Good GRIEF!
Please tell me that not one single person believes that to be a UFO?
Unidentified maybe...
But come on..
Again ..several pages of speculation over a BS post.
I like to give the benefit of the doubt..I really do..
but this is ridiculous.

I am no photo expert, but I am very skilled with photoshop and photography. Looking at every picture, I conclude the same results for every picture,
but I reference this one because it shows every point: s42.photobucket.com...

A few key things to point out about these pictures...In any environment where you have natural light, the location comes from one source or one
general location when dealing with the sun. The angular reflection at the bottom left on the branch has direct sunlight comming from the right side
of the photo, causing a slight "shading" on the left side of the branch. The "object" floating has a reflective property which radiates the light
more towards the viewer, thus providing light more centered on the middle of the "object". This show that the dimension (as in alternate dimension)
that the photo was taken, has a unique light property...from TWO exterior light sources! Also this implies that the objects, while appearing in the
same "frame of reference" were taken at different times.

Second point...One problem with this is the photos are obscurred by a "blur" effect which appear to be about 3-8%. This would eliminate any any
"cropping" effect you would normally find when doctoring up digital pictures. Even in digital photography, a blurry photo has some uniquely clearer
spots, providing the contrast needed to tell real photos from fake ones...that IS NOT the case here. The objects in the foreground are not found to
have any more resolution than those in the background.

Sorry if this dbl posts, but I tried to anonymously reply...
I am no photo expert, but I am very skilled with photoshop and photography. Looking at every picture, I conclude the same results for every picture,
but I reference this one because it shows every point: s42.photobucket.com...

A few key things to point out about these pictures...In any environment where you have natural light, the location comes from one source or one
general location when dealing with the sun. The angular reflection at the bottom left on the branch has direct sunlight comming from the right side
of the photo, causing a slight "shading" on the left side of the branch. The "object" floating has a reflective property which radiates the light
more towards the viewer, thus providing light more centered on the middle of the "object". This show that the dimension (as in alternate dimension)
that the photo was taken, has a unique light property...from TWO exterior light sources! Also this implies that the objects, while appearing in the
same "frame of reference" were taken at different times.

Second point...One problem with this is the photos are obscurred by a "blur" effect which appear to be about 3-8%. This would eliminate any any
"cropping" effect you would normally find when doctoring up digital pictures. Even in digital photography, a blurry photo has some uniquely clearer
spots, providing the contrast needed to tell real photos from fake ones...that IS NOT the case here. The objects in the foreground are not found to
have any more resolution than those in the background.

Pics and movies are useless as proof as they are so easy to fake. Secondly, you saying it's not fake means absolutely nothing. As soon as someone
tells me "this is not fake" I automatically presume it is. If your "proof" can't "sell itself" then it's no use as proof. This pretty much
goes for any pics or movies people are trying to "sell" as proof.

It's an attic ventilator fan. The Grainger catalog I have has a similar model. It looks like it was pasted in and doesn't match the overall exposure
of the images quite perfectly. The image grain looks a little too colorful.

Given by the responses given in this thread if I ever get photo of something I can't explain I won't be posting it on here.

Neither will I Hamlin... the attitude of many of the posters in this thread stinks to high heaven.

ATS is definitely NOT the place to bring any photos, or relate any events, of strange things that might have happened to one. If it ever happened to
me I would try contact one of the UFO groups or researchers out there. ATS would be the last place I'd share anything of this type with.... a
complete waste of time asking this bunch of harpies!

Originally posted by Hamlin
Fair enough be skeptic, express your opinion. But people giving personal abuse and asking for bans? How do you know the so called "hoaxer" wasn't
being hoaxed? As far as I can tell someone posted something he saw that was weird, asked for opinions on what it is, and got a # load of abuse for his
troubles.

What a fantastic place this is to express close-minded opinions. Bravo.

I agree completely... If I were the OP I wouldn't bother returning to this thread. Very sad indeed!

Given by the responses given in this thread if I ever get photo of something I can't explain I won't be posting it on here.

Neither will I Hamlin... the attitude of many of the posters in this thread stinks to high heaven.

Hold on there. Surely you cannot expect every claim to go unchallenged and accepted without strutiny especially in the age of ubiquitously available
tools of fakery. I won't even accept my own perceptions of things I observe at face value regarding the subject of UFOs or supernatural phenomenon
(and well, pretty much any other empirical observation) and they are subject to the same or greater scrutiny I would bring on anything presented here.
This is because I'm interested in the truth of the matter and not simply belief. I am a skeptic, not a debunker and I want to believe it but
even more so I don't want to be fooled by a charlatan.

Look I have seen the real thing many times in my life, I know UFO's exist but that does not mean I am going to sit back and look like a pathetic
gullible idiot and entertain something that is a clearcut hoax.

You call a hoax a hoax. I do not call something that is believable a hoax. I do not jump and scream hoax at every post but this one is blatant and not
even remotely close to good.

BTW Hamlin is a NEW member as well.. registered just to back up the hoaxer?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.